National Republican., 1887-01-15

fscture OF brandy, the fruit rois on the
trees. There Is quite large and intelli-
gent elementin North Carolina that would
prefer to see the taxation on the neces-
saries Of life reduced rather than on what
they denOmlnate 'luxurles' We insist,
though that tobacco Is no longer luxury;
II IL as essential to the laboring man as
food; its necessity is shown by it's vast con-
sumption by all classes. The sugar ques
tion has not been discussed to any extent
among the people OF my state, but my in.
diyidual views are that 1t would be prefer
able to pay bounty to the producer thas
to continue the present SYSTEM
Mr.. Johnson, Of North Carplina: "I
would remove the entire internal revenue
system as speedily as possible That is my
first choice. The tariff reduction ls to us
secondary consideration. Have nothing to
say on the sugar question aud will not have
until We have legislated on internal rev.
enue."
Mr. Warner, of Missouri: al think the
tariff on sugar should be reduced. The
duty on a number Of other articles In com
mon use should be similarly treated Should
vote for a reduction on sugar II 1t came up
Independently"
Mr.. Peters, of Kansas ~ am a hung
jury on the tobacco question. strongly
favor reduction of the duty on sugar.
either from the national or state legisla-
lures, or, perhaps, both. The present pro-
lection has not proved by any means salts
factory. That is why incline to the idea
Of bountles; they will relieve the consumer
and, believe, give the necessary support
and protection to the producer. would
support, conditionally, IA proposition
to reduce the tobacco tax, bu; / re-
ali2s the fact that the necessity
al Il
as that for the articles known as the neces-
saries Of life. II We can remove the tax of
tobacco and still have S50,O00,0O0 over aud
above the surplus required by law am for
IT, The difference OF opinion between the
President and the Secretary OF the Treasury
as to what the surplus should be makes It
somewhat difficult for me to be decided on
this subject Sugar should be relieved first,
and my action on tobacco will be governed
by the surplus on hand after we have legis-
lated on sugar. Sugar fret, tobacco next,
and whisky last--and never.n
Mr.. Willis, OF Keatucky: "The great
body OF the people In my neighborhood are
In favor of systematic legislation on inter-
nal revenue and tariff. The consumer Is
not interested in the reduction OF the to-
bacco tax-the vast monopolies, like the
Lorillards, are shaking this movement In
the faces of the producers and are causing
all the trouble II Congress would only
let the tobacco business alone the excite
ment would subside. Should sugar be
brought before the House as ami ndepend.
ent proposition would vote against II; If It
came In connection with other much needed
reductions would favor consideration"
Mr.. Cabell, of Virginia: ii am heartily
in favor OF removing the tobacco tax. |
think II we ever reach vote on 1t there
will be no doubt us to our success. ! do
not care TO discuss the sugar question just
now.r
Mr.. Sayers, Of Texas IL am opposed to
the removal of the taxes on tobacco cigars,
wines, whisky, or fruit brandy, for the
reason that | believe 1t would inter
fere with and defeat the reduction Of
taxes ON actual necessaries. | am in favor
Of the consideration of reduction OF the
duty on sugar If brought up in connection
with remedial legislation for the other
necessaries of life.